Attention! We have recently (7 Aug) completed a "clean-out" of old listings in the Gearslutz Member Services directory. Any & all listings that were posted more than 365 days ago have been deleted so that we can ensure the directory remains up-to-date. If you had a listing which was for an active service, you will need to resubmit it - please do so at your leisure. Thanks for your help!

Guys hopefully this will turn into one of those classic threads. In the past whenever we talked about the protools mix buss and if good mixes could be acchieved "in the box", there have always been comments about it being possible, but protools mixing needing "a different approach." What I'd like to know is just what that different approach is for you all individually. I know this may seem like a "used" subject, but we always have the questions and problems in threads but we seldom speak of the solutions.

What are your solutions?

Who knows maybe we can get some links to "in the box" mixes in different genres that demonstrate what people recommend as a "different approach"

Well, for example I'll print Outboard FX into PT and line them up. Like when I mix analog, I sometimes use a sub of the kick snare and toms, buss them through a pair of distressors and really whack it. On an analog console, I would just bring them up on a pair of faders. When working with Bro Tools, I receord the Distressed drum sub into the computer and then shift for phase. I do the same thing with some vocal FX too. I don't mix a whole lot in analog, so I don't really know that many....

For better or worse, in Pro Tools I build a mix as I'm tracking. On the plus side, all that dicking around you do as you're tracking gets preserved. Furthermore, the very way the atoms of the room are arranged at the moment is saved. The specific relationship of the instruments that everybody is overdubbing or singing to is still there when you come back to it. When I'm done tracking, the mix is also mostly done.

That can be good or not. But it seems one way to take advantage of a characteristic peculiar to working on a DAW.

Furthermore, when mixing a larger project, I'll often jump from tune to tune as I'm finessing the mixes. Keeps the perspective fresh when you're beating yourself up wondering if the stupid tambourine is too loud or not.

Originally posted by wolfhound yeah, but when working in PT, the "we'll fix it later" attitude seems to be more problematic....

Well, the more you do it the more you come to understand what you can fix and what you can't. I spent a lot of time in my career on 4 track and 8 track systems, and in fact have produced some pretty good stuff bouncing monophonic analog synths back and forth on a 2 track Revox. I can't imagine what it would be like to come up now and be faced with all these unearned possibilities. Was it Sartre who talked about "paralysis in the face of overwhelming options"?,( or something like that.)

Everyone has their own methods in PT. That's part of the charm I suppose.
One way to avoid the boxy, no dimension mixes is to get your mixes out of the box.
There are any number of summing devices that will help you spread the load over your converters instead of crowding the 2 buss. I prefer the Dangerous because of it's build quality and open sound but there are others.
That, along with a good clock will help a great deal.
chap